[SoundFreaq]

I've tried EQUALIZER, but I like EQu best. The interface is much better and it has less bugs. 

 

[meridius]

Quote:

I've tried EQUALIZER, but I like EQu best. The interface is much better and it has less bugs. 

 
Thanks. Can you give me your settings that you entered for the app so I can try it out. Did it improve the base ? I tried the built in iPhone eq and it's crap
 
Cheers

 

[SoundFreaq]

Quote:

 
Thanks. Can you give me your settings that you entered for the app so I can try it out. Did it improve the base ? I tried the built in iPhone eq and it's crap
 
Cheers

 
Yes, the iPhone EQ is complete crap for the most part.
 
I try to leave EQ flat for the most part. For some stuff, I just need more energy. Keep in mind, I'm using Comply Foam Tips, which could sound totally different than what you are using. These EQ specs are for the EQu system specifically, and will only make sense when using it. It won't work with others as their curve sweeps and Q-values are different. 
 
When I want to warm up the low end and give a bit of sparkle to the highs: 
I have a dot at:
33 Hz, 1.5DB
45Hz, 1.5DB
185Hz, 0DB
10000Hz, 0DB
15000kHz, 2DB
 
When I want to listen to some Trance and need a solid sub-bass as well as an immediate Mid-bass, without being bloated and while adding some shimmer up top:
33Hz, 2.5DB
125Hz, 1.8DB
260Hz, 0DB 
1800Hz, 0.1DB
9300Hz, 0DB
15000Hz, 4DB
This is my most used EQ setting. 
 
The rest of these are pure basshead EQ curves. 
 
When I am listening to some of my electronic stuff with solid bass lines, I go for the gold: 
33Hz, 4DB
220Hz, 0DB
8500Hz, 0DB
15000Hz, 5DB
 
For others I'll add in more mid bass, and tone down the sub-bass. 
33Hz, 2DB
90Hz, 3DB
200Hz, 0DB
 
It gets way too bloated and muddy to have loads of both sub and mid-bass. I really only ever EQ the low end very much. I leave the mids entirely alone, and EQ the highs starting from 9000+ in a gentle upward curve, getting higher as the frequency increases. Try playing with various complementing levels of mid and sub-bass. I always like a little extra up top too.
 
Most IEMs have a 7K or 8K spike, so you don't want to EQ that up. 

 

[discombobulation]

Quote:

In my book the Final Audios are excellent in conveying emotion, that's why I love them. The problem is, their cheaper ones, the FI-BA-A1 and SC (SB are colored and not recommended) are technically half a step below the W4, and their flagship, the FI-BA-SS is wickedly expensive. Apart from the FADs the SM3 come to mind. I ultimately failed to warm up to their overly rich mids and "surround" soundstaging, but they were very good at conveying emotion.
 
Edit: Almost forgot the PFE232. Highly recommended if emotion is high on your priority list. Sadly also quite expensive.

How do the FI-BA-SS and PFE232 compare to the W4 in the lower end (sub-bass impact/decay in particular) and high end sparkle? (potentially the two areas of weakness in the W4, that I can see)
 
How about soundstaging + instrument separation + speed (W4s major advantage IMO).

 

[james444]

Quote:

How do the FI-BA-SS and PFE232 compare to the W4 in the lower end (sub-bass impact/decay in particular) and high end sparkle? (potentially the two areas of weakness in the W4, that I can see)
 
How about soundstaging + instrument separation + speed (W4s major advantage IMO).

Well, first of all let's see if we both perceive the W4 similarly, to establish a common understanding on which to base the comparison. Here's an older post of mine from this thread:
 
Quote:

I agree with Eric that the W4 aren't up there with the very best when it comes to transparency and believe that's due to a combination of slight warmth, slightly thick note and slightly subdued dynamics. None of these is actually bothersome on its own, but altogether they make an audible difference in transparency as compared with a phone like the e-Q7. That said, I still rate the W4 overall higher than the e-Q7.

 
While that slight warmth and slightly subdued dynamics makes them pleasantly laid-back and unaggressive, I believe it also affects clarity, transparity and liveliness in a negative way, which would all be important to convey emotion.
 
Both the FI-BA-SS and PFE232 aren't anything like that. They're crystal clear and transparent (the former even ruthlessly so) and not only have significantly more high end sparkle, but also a better dynamics and liveliness. Still, it should be mentioned that both of them sound leaner than the W4, due to a slightly lighter note presentation and less warmth.
 
The FI-BA-SS have excellent, extended bass without artificial boost (like the W4), the PFE232 are similar with a tad more punch and emphasis on mid-bass. I actually prefer the W4's lighter and more balanced bass to the PFE232's by a very slight margin.
 
All of them being high-end BAs, separation and speed is top notch. The single armature FI-BA-SS is even a bit faster than the others, but seems to suffer slightly more when things get busy, so the overall outcome is about on par.
 
As for soundstage, both the W4 and PFE232 are very generous for closed IEMs in that regard. The FI-BA-SS are vented and that adds ambience and openness to the presentation, which makes them sound even more spatious to my ears, albeit at the cost of some isolation.
 
Overall, while I consider both phones clearly superior to the W4 in conveying emotion, I can't really recommend the FI-BA-SS unless you're absolutely aware of what you're in for. They have a rawness and ruthlessness that's unlike any other IEMs I've heard (including customs) and are certainly not everybody's cup of tea. The PFE232 are better behaved and almost equally clear and transparent. Plus, considering they offer detachable cables with included optional iPhone remote at less than half the price of the FI-BA-SS, they're ultimately also the better deal.

 

[Pyxis]

Finally got my W4s back from reshelling.

Paired with the Silver Dragon cables, they sound amazing. Separation of vocals from instruments and instruments from instruments have definitely improved. Female vocals sound amazing with them. Mids have extended, soundstage a slight bit, and the bass has become tighter. I'm not going to comment on the highs because I can't hear quite a bit of that frequency range, but from what I hear, there's not much of a difference, but certainly an improvement. I'd like it to be sharper though, but that's just how the sound signature of the W4s are like.

Mids just sound amazing.

 

[i2ehan]

Ooh! Pics please. 

 

[Pyxis]

 

[discombobulation]

Quote:

Well, first of all let's see if we both perceive the W4 similarly, to establish a common understanding on which to base the comparison. Here's an older post of mine from this thread:
 
 
While that slight warmth and slightly subdued dynamics makes them pleasantly laid-back and unaggressive, I believe it also affects clarity, transparity and liveliness in a negative way, which would all be important to convey emotion.
 
Both the FI-BA-SS and PFE232 aren't anything like that. They're crystal clear and transparent (the former even ruthlessly so) and not only have significantly more high end sparkle, but also a better dynamics and liveliness. Still, it should be mentioned that both of them sound leaner than the W4, due to a slightly lighter note presentation and less warmth.
 
The FI-BA-SS have excellent, extended bass without artificial boost (like the W4), the PFE232 are similar with a tad more punch and emphasis on mid-bass. I actually prefer the W4's lighter and more balanced bass to the PFE232's by a very slight margin.
 
All of them being high-end BAs, separation and speed is top notch. The single armature FI-BA-SS is even a bit faster than the others, but seems to suffer slightly more when things get busy, so the overall outcome is about on par.
 
As for soundstage, both the W4 and PFE232 are very generous for closed IEMs in that regard. The FI-BA-SS are vented and that adds ambience and openness to the presentation, which makes them sound even more spatious to my ears, albeit at the cost of some isolation.
 
Overall, while I consider both phones clearly superior to the W4 in conveying emotion, I can't really recommend the FI-BA-SS unless you're absolutely aware of what you're in for. They have a rawness and ruthlessness that's unlike any other IEMs I've heard (including customs) and are certainly not everybody's cup of tea. The PFE232 are better behaved and almost equally clear and transparent. Plus, considering they offer detachable cables with included optional iPhone remote at less than half the price of the FI-BA-SS, they're ultimately also the better deal.

Thanks for the reply.
 
I generally agree with your initial W4 impressions, particularly the hit on clarity and transparency. I think the W4 are lively and vibrant though, in comparison to other IEMs they sound almost boisterous lol.
 
Regardless, it seems like you value a certain level of analytical-ness as a component in conveying emotion.
 
The FI-BA-SS sound almost aggressively analytical in comparison to the W4, would I be correct in saying that they are unforgiving to poor sources? I listen to a huge range of genres, including metal of varying recording/mastering quality, so I require somewhat forgiving IEMs. The W4 seem to be hitting the sweet spot for me, as they can also take a stunning recording and run with it (though perhaps not to the extent that more analytical phones can). The reduction in isolation and 'leaner' sound compared to the W4 already seem to rule the FI-BA-SS out for me, as I think the W4 are not overly warm as they are.
 
Regarding the PFE232, the relatively imbalanced bass and the greater midbass emphasis seem to rule it out for me as well. The W4 bass is exquisitely balanced and textured (for a BA, I think the top-tier dynamics still do this marginally better). The Westone house signature includes a detectable midbass hump in all their IEMs - one of the main reasons I moved from W3 to W4, to reign in the midbass hump. The same hump is present in the W4, but to an enjoyable and non-intrusive level IMO. A greater midbass emphasis would be a bit too much, I think.
 
I suppose the W4 are almost perfect for me, I only occasionally crave greater sub-bass texturing/impact/extension. Currently EQing Amarra to get this kick, and it does sound pretty sublime, though I have heard more natural and textured subbass in the dynamics (like the GR07). So far, I haven't read of any universals (I don't intend to go custom, for a number of reasons) that can offer this kind of sound sig.
 
On that note, what do people think would be the next step after W4s in terms of headphones? Particularly looking for greater subbass/treble sparkle etc.

 

[james444]

Spot-on assessment and I agree, in that case neither of them would fit you. Well, that leaves only one potential upgrade I could think of, the BA/DD hybrid AKG K3003. Check the thread.

 

[SoundFreaq]

For those of you that feel the W4 (though reined in from the W3) still has a mid-bass hump, what frequency and level do you place on it? For example 80-130 Hz, 1.5-2DB. ??

 

[discombobulation]

Quote:

Spot-on assessment and I agree, in that case neither of them would fit you. Well, that leaves only one potential upgrade I could think of, the BA/DD hybrid AKG K3003. Check the thread.

Oh god. $1000. Wasn't even aware these things existed.
 
About to peruse the thread...if these seem like the holy grail...well, let's just say I'll be surviving on toast for a few years.

 

[briskly]

Quote:

Spot-on assessment and I agree, in that case neither of them would fit you. Well, that leaves only one potential upgrade I could think of, the BA/DD hybrid AKG K3003. Check the thread.

My wallet, my savings, NO! Damn AKG for perfecting headphones! I was hoping they could simply fade into obscurity with their staggering price, but I guess I will learn to love the taste of cup noodle and flour. Again.

 
Quote:

For those of you that feel the W4 (though reined in from the W3) still has a mid-bass hump, what frequency and level do you place on it? For example 80-130 Hz, 1.5-2DB. ??

 
+12db at 20hz (rumble), +6 db at 33hz, -4 at 125hz (boom), -2 at 250hz (warmth). Those are my settings anyway. See what you hear.

 

[SoundFreaq]

Quote:

 
+12db at 20hz (rumble), +6 db at 33hz, -4 at 125hz (boom), -2 at 250hz (warmth). Those are my settings anyway. See what you hear.

Hmmm, very interesting. To me, the bass doesn't sound full enough with your setting, but when I add in more mid-bass, it just sounds more bloated. 
 
What EQ program is that? With EQu on iPhone, I can only EQ down to 33, so I can't hit that low rumble. 

 

[briskly]

Quote:

Hmmm, very interesting. To me, the bass doesn't sound full enough with your setting, but when I add in more mid-bass, it just sounds more bloated. 
 
What EQ program is that? With EQu on iPhone, I can only EQ down to 33, so I can't hit that low rumble. 

Oh let me explain that. I tend to equalize to what I hear as a flat curve. I should mention I came up with the EQ on my computer with EasyQ. With my portable, I can't reach that low either.

Oh, silly me. I Should say that that is where the curve is at, rather than place the points there. So for Equ, i would put it at +6db at 33hz and -4db for 125hz. Warmth would be upper bass stuff (125-250) and thickness of mids is something like 250 to 400, FWIR.